Scottish Executive

Audiology

Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will take action against NHS boards that do not meet its objective of providing digital hearing aids and support on a routine basis where they are the most clinically effective option, as referred to in A Partnership for a Better Scotland .

Mr Tom McCabe: I refer the member to the answer given to question S2W-1824 on 27 August 2003. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search .

Autism

Carolyn Leckie (Central Scotland) (SSP): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-1453 by Cathy Jamieson on 18 August 2003, whether it will direct that information on how many people with an autistic spectrum disorder are held in prison or secure accommodation is collected, collated and published.

Cathy Jamieson: The Scottish Executive’s annual statistical collection on children in secure establishments is reviewed regularly. I have asked my officials to consider including information on the nature of the learning disability, as part of the next review of these statistics. Should this be feasible, such figures could be published, subject to restrictions to preserve confidentiality if the numbers were found to be very small.

  The Scottish Prison Service plans to introduce a new G-Pass computerised medical record system by 2005 following the upgrade of its prison record system in 2004. This will enable the collation of statistics on a wider range of health related matters currently held on individual confidential health care records.

Civil Partnerships

Michael Matheson (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive when it will start consultation on civil partnership registration.

Cathy Jamieson: The Scottish Executive has been carefully considering the issue of civil partnership registration in recent months. The Department of Trade and Industry published a consultation paper at the end of June on a possible civil partnership registration scheme for same-sex couples. The scheme is a mixture of reserved policies such as pensions, benefits, taxation and immigration issues and devolved matters such as registration, family law issues on the breakdown of a relationship or the death of one party, and detailed considerations such as prison visiting and who can register a death or consent to medical treatment for an ill partner.

  We have been considering how best to handle the implications of the UK Government’s proposals should they decide to proceed with legislation.

  The Scottish Executive has also been mindful of the legal rights of same-sex couples. The creation of a civil partnership registration scheme to provide same-sex couples with the opportunity to register their partnership and trigger access to some employment benefits is the approach taken by the UK Government to ensure compliance with the EU Employment Directive (2000/78/EC). In the absence of Scottish provisions, couples will have to travel down south to get some of the rights of their counterparts in England and Wales. There could be a legal challenge by a Scottish same-sex couple on grounds of discrimination.

  In examining the options for Scottish legislation, key considerations have been the intertwining of devolved and reserved policy issues, our desire to avoid a complex web of differing rights emerging between Scotland and England and Wales, and the advantages which parity offers in relation to cross-border issues. Separate legislation north and south of the border would lead to a complicated set of arrangements understood by few people. We have therefore concluded that a Sewel motion to include Scottish provisions in any future UK legislation offers the most effective and sensible means of delivering a package of rights and responsibilities for committed same-sex couples.

  The DTI is already consulting with Scottish interests on the reserved elements of their civil partnership scheme. It is our intention to consult on the devolved elements and to publish a short paper around the end of this month.

Energy

Shiona Baird (North East Scotland) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive what extra assistance it will provide for the development of fuel cell technology and research, following the performance of the BOC Gh2ost in the Shell Eco-Marathon in Alford on 10 August 2003.

Lewis Macdonald: The Executive already contributes towards the cost of the Carbon Trust’s Low Carbon Innovation programme which provides funding for research into fuel cells and other innovative energy technologies.

Homelessness

Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what the cost of housing homeless people in (a) bed and breakfast accommodation, (b) local authority-owned property, (c) hostels and (d) other temporary accommodation has been in each year since 1997, broken down by local authority.

Ms Margaret Curran: The information requested is not held centrally. Costs will vary considerably within each type of tenure according to the assessed needs of each individual homeless person as well as between local authorities. While local authorities should now hold improved homelessness data as a result of recent work to develop local homelessness strategies, we have no plans at present to request an analysis of such cost information from local authorities.

Housing

Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether money held in blocked right to buy accounts will be made available to registered social landlords.

Ms Margaret Curran: I have asked Angiolina Foster, Acting Chief Executive, Communities Scotland to respond. Her response is as follows:

  There are some circumstances where lenders require assignation of right to buy (RTB) proceeds to accounts held with the lenders (often referred to as blocked RTB accounts) and thereafter proceeds are released subject to completion of monitoring processes.

  The proceeds of these sales from RTB receipts, on release from blocked RTB accounts, are always allocated according to the agreed sharing arrangement. They are used to firstly redeem the private loan attached to the property sold and thereafter repaid to the local authority or Scottish Homes or Scottish Executive.

  There is no circumstance where money held in blocked right to buy accounts is exclusively available to Registered Social Landlords (RSL) until all their obligations, which are set out in various procedures have been fully complied with by the RSL.

Justice

David McLetchie (Edinburgh Pentlands) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive in what order of priority topics will be considered by the Sentencing Commission to be chaired by Lord MacLean, and over what timescale such topics will be considered.

Cathy Jamieson: The work programme of the Sentencing Commission will be settled by the commission itself, in consultation with ministers, once its membership has been decided. Topics for early consideration are likely to include bail and remand, consistency of sentencing and the automatic early release of short-term prisoners.

Non-Domestic Rates

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how much non-domestic rates income it received in 2001-02 from public bodies or organisations that it funds.

Mr Andy Kerr: This information is not held centrally.

Renewable Energy

Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive what improvements are being made to the National Grid infrastructure to ensure that the target of generating 40% of energy from renewable sources by 2020 is met.

Lewis Macdonald: We continue to work with the UK Government, the regulator Ofgem, and the industry to ensure that the grid is strengthened in order to fully realise Scotland’s renewable energy potential. Both Scottish and Southern Energy and Scottish Power have recently announced that they are undertaking the survey work necessary to support a significant strengthening of the transmission network in their respective areas.

Scottish Natural Heritage

Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive on what date it invited Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) to produce a proposal to address the detail of the relocation of SNH's headquarters to Inverness; whether it has received such a proposal from SNH and, if not, whether it will impose a deadline for its submission; how many staff of SNH will remain in Edinburgh and how many will be relocated to the new headquarters, and whether it expects the SNH proposal to address this matter.

Allan Wilson: Ross Finnie wrote to the Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) Chairman on 2 September and a ministerial direction, under section 11 of the Natural Heritage (Scotland) Act 1991, was issued on the same day. The direction requires SNH to produce a project plan for the relocation and submit this to the Scottish ministers by 31 October 2003. The costed project plan will set out all the stages, dates and progress to be achieved in making the relocation to Inverness happen.

  In response to Ross Finnie’s invitation of 9 July, SNH has put forward a case to retain a number of staff in Edinburgh, or nearby. No decision has yet been taken on this matter. I expect that details of the number of staff remaining in the Edinburgh area will be included in the project plan.

Tenements (Scotland) Bill

Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive when it will introduce its draft Tenements (Scotland) Bill.

Ms Margaret Curran: The Tenements (Scotland) Bill will be introduced early in 2004.

Weeds Act 1959

Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many notices have been served under the Weeds Act 1959 in each year since 1960 and, of these, how many related to ragwort.

Ross Finnie: The table shows the number of notices served under the Weeds Act 1959 for each year since 1960 in which a notice was served, and the number of these notices which related to ragwort.

  


Year 
  

1995 
  

1996 
  

1997 
  

1998 
  

1999 
  

2000 
  

2001 
  

2002 
  



Number of notices served 
  

1 
  

0 
  

1 
  

1 
  

0 
  

0 
  

2 
  

3 
  



Number of notices relating to ragwort 
  

1 
  

0 
  

1 
  

1 
  

0 
  

0 
  

1 
  

0

Weeds Act 1959

Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many notices served under the Weeds Act 1959 in each year since 1960 resulted in a prosecution and, of these, how many have been followed by further offences under section 2(2) of the act.

Ross Finnie: Since 1960 there have been no notices served under the Weeds Act 1959 which have resulted in prosecution. They have therefore not been followed by further offences under section 2(2) of the act.

Weeds Act 1959

Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive on how many occasions it, and the former Scottish Office, (a) sought to recover and (b) were successful in recovering, costs under section 3 of the Weeds Act 1959 in each year since 1960.

Ross Finnie: On no occasion since 1960 has the Scottish Executive, and former Scottish Office, sought to recover costs under section 3 of the Weeds Act 1959.

Weeds Act 1959

Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many personnel are involved in the enforcement of the Weeds Act 1959 in (a) its departments and (b) local authorities.

Ross Finnie: Each of the 16 Environment and Rural Affairs area offices which undertake day-to-day enforcement of the Weeds Act 1959 has a co-ordinator who is responsible for the investigation of all written complaints about injurious weeds. The table gives man days spent enforcing the Weeds Act over the last four years, taken from 1 April to 31 March.

  


1999-2000 
  

2000-01 
  

2001-02 
  

2002-03 
  



29 
  

41 
  

49 
  

70 
  



  In headquarters, three members of staff are involved in enforcing the Weeds Act 1959. This work comprises around 2% of their combined annual workload.

  The number of personnel involved in the enforcement of the Weeds Act 1959 in local authorities is a matter for the individual local authorities. The information requested is not held centrally.